June 5, 2025 | GableGotwals has been recognized by Chambers USA 2025 as a leading firm in the areas of Corporate/Commercial (Band 1), Energy & Natural Resources (Band 1), Environment (Band 1), Insurance (Band 1), Intellectual Property (Band 2), Labor & Employment (Band 3), Litigation – General Commercial (Band 1), Native American Law (Band 1), Real Estate (Band 2), and Tax (Band 1) in Oklahoma by Chambers & Partners. In addition, 24 GableGotwals attorneys have also been recognized as leaders in their field.

Chambers rankings are assessed on technical legal ability, professional conduct, client service, commercial astuteness, diligence, commitment, and other qualities most valued by the client. Interviews are conducted with peers outside of the firm and clients in order to determine inclusion and rankings.

Attorneys recognized include:

Corporate/Commercial – Band 1

Jason B. Coutant (Band 3)

Jeffrey D. Hassell (Band 1)

Stephen W. Lake (Band 2)

Thomas Hutchison (Band 3)

Energy & Natural Resources – Band 1

Rob Robertson (Band 3)

Terry Ragsdale (Band 2)

Environment – Band 1

Lloyd Landreth (Band 1)

Insurance – Band 1

Leasa Stewart (Band 1)

Lance Leffel (Band 2)

Carrie McNeer (Up and Coming)

Intellectual Property – Band 2

James F. Lea, III (Band 3)

Todd A. Nelson (Band 1)

David G. Woodral (Band 2)

Paul E. Rossler (Band 3)

Labor & Employment – Band 3

Chris S. Thrutchley (Band 2)

Ellen Adams (Band 3)

Litigation—General Commercial – Band 1

David Bryant (Senior Statespeople)

Amelia A. Fogleman (Band 2)

Robert G. McCampbell (Band 3)

Native American Law – Band 1

Amelia A. Fogleman (Band 3)

Dean Luthey (Band 1)

Barrett L. Powers (Up and Coming)

Trent Shores (Band 2)

Real Estate – Band 2

Tina N. Soin (Band 3)

Tax – Band 1

James Scears (Band 2)

June 21, 2024 | By: Christopher Shrock

Five former Directors of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently called on current USPTO Director Kathi Vidal to withdraw proposed changes to terminal disclaimer rules 37 CFR 1.321(c) and (d) (89 FR 40439). Vidal’s predecessors claimed, among other things, that the proposed rule would depart the “normal process of considering each patent claim on its own merits.” What do they mean? Why is this significant?

Currently, terminal disclaimers stop patent applicants from securing rights to their inventions for more than the 20-year limit prescribed by Congress. When a first patent application won’t cover the full scope of an invention, the applicant can file a second or “continuation” application, based on the first application, to pursue rights on the rest of the breakthrough. However, if the USPTO believes that the scope of the second application is “obvious” in view of the first application, the examiner will require the applicant to shorten the life of the patent sought in the second application. You can’t have 20 years on a first “parent” patent plus additional time on a second, nearly-identical “child” patent. So the applicant must submit a disclaimer terminating the child patent whenever its parent would reach its natural end.

The problem with continuation applications, from the USPTO’s point of view, is the potential for abusive redundancies. For example, an applicant with deep pockets could use continuation applications to obtain “multiple patents directed to obvious variants” so that, even if a court or the USPTO later invalidates one patent, the invention will still have protection from the others. And a defendant in an infringement action seeking to escape liability through invalidation (i.e., arguing that the USPTO should never have issued the patent at issue) would have to challenge each and every variant individually—a daunting task for shallow-pockets (89 FR 40439).

The USPTO’s proposal would solve this problem by adding a new function to terminal disclaimers, namely, making child patents depend on their parents for validity. Under the proposed rule, a child patent would become unenforceable if claims from the corresponding parent application were invalidated. The deep-pocketed troll could fire its barrage of infringement claims, but the defendant could escape liability through invalidation of just one patent—the parent. Thus, the rule would try to level the playing field for shallow-pocketed defendants.

Most likely, the proposed rule would make little difference to some patent families, for example, those obtained by the following one-two strategy: quickly obtaining a narrow patent before pursuing a broader, more methodical one. If the claims of the second patent fully eclipse the claims of the first, then, logically, if the first is invalid, so is the second. If you can’t patent a Tyrian purple adamantine cylinder with a hole through one end, then you also can’t patent a more generic metal cylinder with a hole through one end. Thus, the rule would do away with the formality of arguing the broader claim.

But consider another scenario. Suppose a parent patent has two independent claims, for example, (1) a Tyrian purple adamantine cylinder with a hole in one end, and (2) the use of that cylinder as a bathroom doorstop. Also suppose the applicant obtains a child patent, expanding the original claims to cover (1’) the cylinder in various shades of aubergine and (2’) methods applying it to sliding-glass and doggie doors. The USPTO demands a terminal disclaimer for the second patent, which the applicant files. Later, an alleged infringer of claim (2’) uses a Tyrian purple adamantine cylinder with a hole in one end as a doorstop for a doggie door. The patent holder files suit. The defendant, instead of arguing the claim at issue, challenges (1), the device claim from the parent. Under the USPTO’s propose rule, an invalidation of any claim from the first patent renders the second patent unenforceable. Thus, when the court invalidates claim (1), claim (2’) becomes unenforceable, and the defendant prevails—even though no court reviewed claim (2’), or even claim (2). The defendant escapes liability with zero consideration of the infringed claim.

The USPTO leaves no ambiguity about how it intends to apply the rule if adopted. Its Examples 4 and 5 show that any invalidated claim in a parent patent would render every claim from every child patent unenforceable, regardless of relationships among claims. If using a Tyrian purple adamantine cylinder with a hole through one end as a doorstop for a doggie door proved to be the most ingenious and economically efficient innovation of a generation, then the inventor would not reap a reward after the claim for the cylinder itself was invalidated. The applicant and the USPTO’s failure to omit claim (1) from the parent patent would doom the true innovation without direct consideration. Hence, the former directors’ concern to preserve the “normal process,” whereby each claim stands or falls on its own merits.

Arguably, circumventing the “normal process” in the manner proposed by the USPTO threatens to undermine inventors’ statutory rights, which promise enforceable patent rights for new and nonobvious inventions. If so, then the proposed rule may be unlawful. Without the rule, however, the USPTO’s concern about redundant child patents remains unresolved. Perhaps the notice-and-comment procedure will reveal some less radical approaches to the problem. Comments on the proposed rule will close on July 9, 2024.

Christopher Shrock 918-595-4890 cshrock@gablelaw.com

June 6, 2024 | GableGotwals has been recognized by Chambers USA 2024 as a leading firm in the areas of Corporate/Commercial (Band 1), Energy & Natural Resources (Band 1), Environment (Band 1), Insurance (Band 1), Intellectual Property (Band 2), Labor & Employment (Band 3), Litigation – General Commercial (Band 1), Native American Law (Band 1), Real Estate (Band 2), and Tax (Band 1) in Oklahoma by Chambers & Partners. In addition, 22 GableGotwals attorneys have also been recognized as leaders in their field.

Chambers rankings are assessed on technical legal ability, professional conduct, client service, commercial astuteness, diligence, commitment, and other qualities most valued by the client. Interviews are conducted with peers outside of the firm and clients in order to determine inclusion and rankings.

Attorneys recognized include:

Corporate/Commercial – Band 1

Jason B. Coutant (Band 3)

Jeffrey D. Hassell (Band 2)

Stephen W. Lake (Band 2)

Thomas Hutchison (Up and Coming)

Energy & Natural Resources – Band 1

Rob Robertson (Band 3)

Terry Ragsdale (Band 2)

Environment – Band 1

Lloyd Landreth (Band 1)

Insurance – Band 1

Leasa Stewart (Band 1)

Lance Leffel (Band 2)

Carrie McNeer (Up and Coming)

Intellectual Property – Band 2

James F. Lea, III (Band 3)

Todd A. Nelson (Band 1)

David G. Woodral (Band 3)

Labor & Employment – Band 3

Chris S. Thrutchley (Band 3)

Ellen Adams (Band 3)

Litigation—General Commercial – Band 1

David Bryant (Senior Statespeople)

Amelia A. Fogleman (Band 3)

Dean Luthey (Band 3)

Robert G. McCampbell (Band 3)

Native American Law – Band 1

Amelia A. Fogleman (Band 3)

Dean Luthey (Band 1)

Trent Shores (Band 3)

Real Estate – Band 2

Stephen Schuller (Band 3)

Tax – Band 1

James Scears (Band 3)

GableGotwals is pleased to announce that 74 lawyers have been recognized in the 2024 Edition of The Best Lawyers in America, four of which were newly included, and seven newly named on the “Ones to Watch” list. In addition, eight GableGotwals attorneys were named 2024 “Lawyer of the Year.”

Best Lawyers has published their list for more than three decades. Its first international list was published in 2006, and since then has grown to provide lists in more than 75 countries. Lawyers on The Best Lawyers in America list are divided by geographic region and practice areas and are reviewed by their peers on the basis of professional expertise.

GableGotwals would like to congratulate the following attorneys named to 2024 The Best Lawyers in America list:

	Ellen A. Adams Oklahoma City	Energy Law
	Steven J. Adams Tulsa	Commercial Litigation Mass Tort Litigation/Class Action-Defendants
	John R. Barker Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law Corporate Law Securities/Capital Markets Law
	Brandon C. Bickle Tulsa	Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Commercial Litigation
	David L. Bryant Tulsa	Arbitration Bet-the-Company Litigation Commercial Litigation Mediation
	Meagan E.W. Burrows Tulsa	“Ones to Watch” Healthcare Law Business Organizations (Including LLCs and Partnerships) Banking and Finance Law
	Frank J. Catalano Tulsa	Copyright Law Patent Law Trademark Law
	Emily R. Collins Oklahoma City	Litigation – Trusts and Estates
	Casey Cooper Tulsa	Commercial Litigation
	Jason B. Coutant Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law Corporate Law
	Jeffrey A. Curran Oklahoma City	Insurance Law Personal Injury Litigation – Defendants Product Liability Litigation – Defendants
	John D. Dale Tulsa	Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law
	Gerard M. D’Emilio Oklahoma City	“Ones to Watch” Appellate Practice Commercial Litigation
	Renee DeMoss Tulsa	Insurance Law Commercial Litigation Litigation – ERISA(Lawyer of the Year)
	Adam C. Doverspike Tulsa	“Ones to Watch” Administrative / Regulatory Law Appellate Practice Commercial Litigation Municipal Law Litigation – Construction
	E. Talitha Ebrite Oklahoma City	Oil and Gas Law Energy Law Banking and Finance Law Commercial Litigation
	Alicia J. Edwards Tulsa	Patent Law
	LeAnn Drummond Ellis Tulsa	Litigation – Trusts and Estates
	Philip Feist Tulsa	Trusts and Estates
	Grant A. Fitz Tulsa	Litigation – Insurance
	Craig A. Fitzgerald Tulsa	Commercial Litigation Insurance Law Litigation – Antitrust Litigation – Intellectual Property
	Amelia A. Fogleman Tulsa	Appellate Practice (Lawyer of the Year) Commercial Litigation Litigation – Antitrust
	John A. Gaberino, Jr. Tulsa	Energy Law
	Robert J. Getchell Tulsa	Bankruptcy and Debtor Rights/Insolvency and Reorganization Law Litigation – Real Estate
	Jeffrey D. Hassell Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law (Lawyer of the Year) Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Corporate Law
	Jeffrey T. Haughey Tulsa	Securities/Capital Markets Law Securities Regulation
	Steven G. Heinen Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law Corporate Law
	Philip D. Hixon Tulsa	Appellate Practice Commercial Litigation
	Andrew J. Hofland Tulsa	Commercial Litigation
	Thomas J. Hutchison Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law Corporate Law Real Estate Law
	Susan Jordan Tulsa	Healthcare Law Litigation – Healthcare
	Scott Kiplinger Oklahoma City	“Ones to Watch” Litigation – Construction Oil and Gas Law
	Jake Krattiger Oklahoma City	Commercial Litigation Oil and Gas Law
	Stephen W. Lake Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law Commercial Litigation Corporate Law Energy Law Mergers and Acquisitions Law Oil and Gas Law Securities/Capital Markets Law Securities Regulation
	Lloyd W. Landreth Tulsa	Litigation – Environmental (Lawyer of the Year) Natural Resources Law
	James F. Lea, III Tulsa	Copyright Law Patent Law (Lawyer of the Year) Trademark Law
	Lance Leffel Oklahoma City	Commercial Litigation Insurance Law Construction Law Litigation – Insurance
	David P. Limekiller Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law Commercial Litigation
	Justin A. Lollman Tulsa	“Ones to Watch” Appellate Practice Commercial Litigation Criminal Defense: White-Collar Labor and Employment Law – Management
	Graydon Dean Luthey, Jr. Tulsa	Commercial Litigation Corporate Compliance Law Corporate Governance Law Corporate Law Gaming Law Native American Law
	Robert G. McCampbell Oklahoma City	Administrative / Regulatory Law  (Lawyer of the Year) Bet-the-Company Litigation Commercial Litigation Criminal Defense: White-Collar Government Contracts Government Relations Practice (Lawyer of the Year) Healthcare Law Litigation – Regulatory Enforcement (SEC, Telecom, Energy)
	David B. McKinney Tulsa	Employee Benefits (ERISA) Law Healthcare Law Litigation – ERISA Trusts and Estates
	Nick Merkley Oklahoma City	Energy Law Commercial Litigation
	Motahareh H. Nickel Oklahoma City	“Ones to Watch” Banking and Finance Law Mergers and Acquisitions Law
	Todd A. Nelson Tulsa	Copyright Law Litigation – Patent
	Richard B. Noulles Tulsa	Natural Resources Law (Lawyer of the Year) Commercial Litigation Bet-the-Company Litigation Oil and Gas Law
	Leo J. Portman Oklahoma City	Corporate Law Energy Law Litigation – Trusts and Estates
	Barrett Powers Tulsa	“Ones to Watch” Commercial Litigation
	Terry D. Ragsdale Tulsa	Commercial Litigation Energy Law
	Rob F. Robertson Oklahoma City	Commercial Litigation Corporate Governance Law Energy Law Litigation – Banking and Finance Litigation – Bankruptcy Litigation – Environmental Litigation – Real Estate Oil and Gas Law
	Paul E. Rossler Tulsa	Patent Law Technology Law Trademark Law
	John Henry Rule Tulsa	Banking and Finance Law Commercial Litigation Litigation – Banking and Finance Litigation – First Amendment
	John D. Russell Tulsa	Bet-the-Company Litigation Commercial Litigation
	Stephen A. Schuller Tulsa	Energy Law Land Use and Zoning Law Litigation – Real Estate Real Estate Law
	G. Blaine Schwabe, III Oklahoma City	Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law Bet-the-Company Litigation Commercial Litigation
	Deborah C. Shallcross Tulsa	Appellate Practice Arbitration Family Law
	Trent Shores Tulsa	Commercial Litigation
	Lisa T. Silvestri Tulsa	Energy Law Insurance Law
	Ashlyn M. Smith Oklahoma City	“Ones to Watch” Oil and Gas Law
	Leasa M. Stewart Oklahoma City	Insurance Law Litigation – ERISA
	Amy M. Stipe Oklahoma City	Commercial Litigation Oil and Gas Law
	Timothy J. Sullivan, Jr. Tulsa	Energy Law Commercial Litigation
	John D. Sullivan Houston	Commercial Litigation
	Sidney K. Swinson Tulsa	Bankruptcy and Creditor Debtor Rights / Insolvency and Reorganization Law (Lawyer of the Year) Bet-the-Company Litigation Litigation – Bankruptcy
	Chris S. Thrutchley Tulsa	Employment Law – Management Labor Law – Management
	Mia Vahlberg Tulsa	Commercial Litigation Corporate Law Energy Law Insurance Law Oil and Gas Law
	Tom C. Vincent II Tulsa	FinTech Practice Information Technology Law Privacy and Data Security Law
	Jay P. Walters Oklahoma City	Litigation – Mergers and Acquisitions Litigation – Securities Native American Law
	Brad W. Welsh Tulsa	Appellate Practice Commercial Litigation
	Paula M. Williams Oklahoma City	Employment Law – Management Litigation – Labor and Employment
	David G. Woodral Tulsa	Patent Law Trademark Law
	Scott R. Zingerman Tulsa	Copyright Law Patent Law Trade Secrets Law

Best Lawyers lists are compiled based on an exhaustive peer review evaluation, therefore, honorees are not required or allowed to pay a fee to be included.  However, to be listed on the Best Lawyers web site, there is a required advertising fee.

GableGotwals has been recognized by Chambers USA 2023 as a leading firm in the areas of Corporate/Commercial (Band 1), Energy & Natural Resources (Band 1), Environment (Band 1), Tax (Band 1), Intellectual Property (Band 2), General Commercial Litigation (Band 2), Native American Law (Band 2), Real Estate (Band 2), and Labor & Employment (Band 3) in Oklahoma by Chambers & Partners. In addition, 19 GableGotwals attorneys have also been recognized as leaders in their field.

Chambers rankings are assessed on technical legal ability, professional conduct, client service, commercial astuteness, diligence, commitment, and other qualities most valued by the client. Interviews are conducted with peers outside of the firm and clients in order to determine inclusion and rankings.

Attorneys recognized include:

Corporate/Commercial – Band 1
Jason B. Coutant (Band 3)
Jeffrey D. Hassell (Band 2)
Stephen W. Lake (Band 2)
Thomas Hutchison (Up and Coming)

Energy & Natural Resources – Band 1
Dale Cottingham (Band 3)
Rob Robertson (Band 3)
Terry Ragsdale (Band 2)

Environment – Band 1
Lloyd Landreth (Band 1)

Tax – Band 1
James Scears (Up and Coming)

Intellectual Property – Band 2
James F. Lea, III (Band 3)
Todd A. Nelson (Band 1)
David G. Woodral (Band 3)

Litigation—General Commercial – Band 2
David Bryant (Senior Statespeople)
Amelia A. Fogleman (Band 3)
Dean Luthey (Band 3)
Robert G. McCampbell (Band 3)
Leasa Stewart (Band 3)

Native American Law – Band 2
Amelia A. Fogleman (Band 3)
Dean Luthey (Band 1)

Real Estate – Band 2
Stephen Schuller (Band 3)

Labor & Employment – Band 3
Chris S. Thrutchley (Band 3)